Summary
The Kansas Supreme Court held that Justin Jones received an illegal sentence because the sentencing court failed to follow the required two-step departure procedure under Jessica's Law and the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act. The court rejected the State's argument that Jones could not challenge the sentence because it was agreed upon in a plea agreement, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing; Jones's constitutional challenge to lifetime postrelease supervision was deemed moot.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Jones's 120-month sentence was illegal because the sentencing court failed to follow the required two-step departure procedure by first departing from Jessica's Law to the applicable Kansas Sentencing Guidelines grid box and then justifying any further departure.
- Whether Jones could challenge the allegedly illegal sentence despite having agreed to it as part of a plea agreement.
- Whether Jones's challenge to the adequacy of the findings concerning lifetime postrelease supervision remained justiciable after the sentence was vacated.
Holdings
- A sentencing court departing from the Jessica's Law life sentence under the version of K.S.A. 21-4643(d) applicable to Jones was required first to depart to the appropriate Kansas Sentencing Guidelines grid box and then to comply with the procedures governing any further departure. Because the court skipped the guidelines step and made no findings supporting the additional departure to 120 months, the sentence was illegal.
- A defendant may challenge and obtain correction of an illegal sentence even when the sentence was agreed to in a plea agreement.
- Jones's challenge to the adequacy of the sentencing court's findings regarding lifetime postrelease supervision was moot because the sentence, including postrelease supervision, was vacated.
Key quotations
“"the requirements of neither the first step into the guidelines nor the second step away from the presumptive guidelines sentence can be ignored, and all departure procedures must be followed."” (268 P.3d 493)
“"Where K.S.A. 21-4721 applies, an appellate court's jurisdiction to consider a challenge to a sentence is limited to those grounds authorized by the statute or a claim that the sentence is otherwise illegal."” (268 P.3d 494)
Factual background
Jones pleaded no contest to aggravated indecent liberties with a 6-year-old child, an off-grid person felony subject under Jessica's Law to life imprisonment with a mandatory minimum of 25 years. The State and Jones agreed to a 120-month sentence, and the district court found substantial and compelling reasons to depart from the life sentence. The court did not first impose or identify the presumptive Kansas Sentencing Guidelines sentence, which for Jones's criminal-history score and offense severity level was 55, 59, or 61 months, and did not make findings supporting an additional upward departure to 120 months.
Procedural history
Jones pleaded no contest and entered a plea agreement providing for a 120-month sentence. The district court found substantial and compelling reasons to depart from the Jessica's Law life sentence but imposed the agreed 120-month sentence without first identifying the applicable Kansas Sentencing Guidelines grid sentence or making findings supporting a further departure. The Supreme Court of Kansas held the sentence illegal, vacated it, and remanded for resentencing; it did not reach the constitutional challenge to lifetime postrelease supervision because that issue became moot.
Remand instructions
Vacate Jones's sentence and remand for resentencing in compliance with the required departure procedures. On remand, Jones may renew his motion challenging lifetime postrelease supervision.